Search Results
The present paper draws the reader's attention to the lexical influence of Scandinavian languages on the languages of the Eastern Slavic bloc as well as to the „reverse side of the coin” i.e. the Eastern Slavic lexical influence on the Scandinavian languages. The following points are discussed in the study:1)Russian words of Scandinavian origin.-As it is widely known, in the case of Russian, the influence of the Scandinavian languages began with the emergence of the Rurikovich-dynasty. The changes resulting from it have had their linguistic consequences in Russian, among others, in the form of some loanwords of Scandinavian origin. (About the historical background see Font 1995: 6-42, Pátrovics 1997: 109-116, and ?????????? 1978. Be reminded furthermore that in the case of Polish, the Scandinavian lexical influence can be minimized to inter-state relations to a much lesser degree than in the case of Russian. About the Scandinavian-Polish lexical contacts see Jurkowski 1993: 18-25, Pátrovics 2000: 221-226). 2)Words of Eastern Slavic origin in Scandinavian languages such as Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and Icelandic. 3) Analysis of two etymologies: shelk (silk) and chmel' (hops). 4)'Sovietisms' in the Scandinavian languages. 5)Two Russian toponyms of Scandinavian origin. 6)Epilog and conclusions. 7) References.-I hope that this two-directional approach puts the matter in different new light and the linguistic data will help to understand the intricate question of interrelation of Eastern Slavic and Scandinavian languages.
The present paper deals with the Austrian phraseological units containing elements of Slavic origin. In this paper these phraseological units will be presented and their history described. The author comes to the conclusion that most of the Slavic elements in the Austrian phraseology are of Czech origin.
The paper discusses the sociolinguistic aspect of the influence of Czech migrants upon the linguistic standard of Croatian. In consequence of this influence, Croatian intellectual vocabulary was enriched by hundreds of new expressions including those terms that function in Croatian up to now.
Zsigmond Simonyi was the most influential Hungarian linguist of the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. He acquired wide and deep professional knowledge at various universities in Hungary and abroad. His work was influenced by Neogrammarian ideas but his attitude to them was also critical to the necessary extent. This is demonstrated by the fact that he studied the contacts between Hungarian and the languages spoken in neighbouring countries in the wake of Schuchardt’s ideas. He was a Neogrammarian by education, but his views on historical linguistics were more modern, more akin to those of the younger generation of Neogrammarians. Thus, unlike most representatives of the classical Neogrammarian school, he did not restrict his attention to the phonological aspects of language change. Rather, he also studied larger units like phrases or sentences, as well as semantics. He attached special importance to discussing phenomena of the current spoken language, especially those of the various dialects, to keep track of linguistic facts as evidence for changes that have taken place. The enormous “Historical dictionary of Hungarian” that he co-authored with Gábor Szarvas has retained its value as a source of information to the present day, and continues to be an indispensable tool in research on etymology and historical linguistics.
The article deals with the word koreš ‘close friend’ used in Russian cant. It comes from the Russian verb koreševat’sja ‘to greet each other friendly, to establish friendship and close relations’ that, in turn, has its origin in the Turkic verb körüš- ‘to see each other, to have an audience’. The diplomatic ceremony of koreševan’e ‘a kind of very close embrace’ was common in the Golden Horde and its successor states — the Khanates of the Crimea, Kazan and Astrakhan, the Noghay Horde and Muscovy, at least up to the end of the 16th century. Soon the word koreš (literally:’ a man participating in the ceremony of koreševan’e’) with the meaning ‘true and close friend’ was ejected to the sphere of Russian slang and acquired a secondary, alleged link with the Russian word koren’ ‘root’ as if it were its pseudo-diminutive form.
The paper analyzes the data related to the Slavic words used in the language of Hungarian villages of Western Hungary. Its aim is to draw attention to the phenomena of Hungarian–Slavic (namely Slovenian and Croatian) linguistic contacts.
This paper deals with two ways of expressing possessive relationships, their morphological make-up and the possible circumstances of their emergence. One of these is the habitive construction (`X has Y'), whereas the other is the attributive possessive construction (`X's Y, the Y of X'). The former is a clause, whereas the latter is a phrase. It will be argued that both types of constructions may have emerged in the Uralic languages without the contribution of any foreign influence, but as far as the retention of the latter is concerned, foreign influence may have had a role in it in Uralic languages that were engaged in intensive Uralic--Turkic linguistic contacts.
This paper argues that the hybrid text is a product of a voluntarily incomplete translation process. Hybrid texts are produced by writers who want to highlight their position between cultures, creating a new site of individual and collective expression. Hybrid texts are defined as those texts which use „translation effects” to question the borders of identity. These works, which arise out of hybrid sites of belonging, involve acts of interlingual creation. Three kinds of textual hybridisation which arise out of a number of contexts of cultural and linguistic contact are investigated on the basis of literary texts.
On studying Russian national folk language, I noticed elements which have territorial characteristics due to the cultural and linguistic contacts of Russian people with their neighbours. N. S. Trubetzkoy (1927) determined and studied the Russian cultural zone, which has huge contacts with the Orient. Most of the Russian set expressions show this contact, e. g. ????? ????? 'white bone' with the meaning «aristocratic, blue-blooded». Plenty of Turkish languages have lots of similar expressions. In the Tatar language there is also an expression which consists of components: ak 'white' and soyak 'bone'. It has the phonetic and structural equivalents that appear in the Bashkir, Kazakh and Kirghiz languages. According to studies the Kirghiz set expression: ak sook has given the most important information about the relation between the Turkish and Russian languages. The research has been helped by the work of Hungarian scientist Ármin Vámbéry, which comments on and clarifies the social, ethnographic background of this very complex problem. In the 19th century he wrote about the Kirghiz people, their customs and about the expression: ak szöng, as well. This phraseological collocation has many important historical and social relations with the lives of peoples in Central Asia and theVolga basin.
The linguistic image of the world has been in the focus of linguistic studies in the late 20th century. This problem has close contact with the character of national mentality, which is reflected in the structures of national language. This paper examines the character of Russian folk language, which has specific structures that are not typical for West-Slavic languages. My aim is to make a structural comparison of Russian and West Slavic languages with languages of the East-Euroasiatic area. This comparative research reveals a number of similarities in the vocabulary, phraseology, derivation, and syntax of the languages in the examined territory. The specific element of Russian folk language is the coordinative compound, which is a typical structure of the East-Euroasiatic languages. This type of derivation is not used in West Slavic languages, which is proved by results of our comparative research. The semantic, morphologic, and phonetic parallels between Russian, Finno-Ugric, Turkish, and other Asiatic languages explore the common feature of the linguistic image of the world. This similarity has been formed by cultural and linguistic contacts in the area referred to as the “Russian cultural zone” by N. S. Trubetzkoy.
